I think I know why so many Cirrus' crash

Coming back from KCOS to 00V today several aircraft were in the
pattern for runway 33 and some people wanted runway 15 since the winds
were at the changeover point. With one or two at the runup area for
runway 15 I just went east until the fiasco was sorted out (I made
several position reports since people were all over).

Once that happened I announced my intentions (enter left downwind for
15) about 7-8 miles out and not long after that a Cirrus announced he
was 10 miles out. When I was on left downwind the Cirrus pilot
broadcast that he was on about 4 mile base for 15. I "assumed" he
meant downwind. Then when I was about to turn base he called out four
mile FINAL for 15. I saw a plane in that area and turned base
(calling it out by radio of course)

He asked if I was cutting in front of him and I stated "Looks like
it."

Soon thereafter I decided that I was too fast so went around then when
on downwind again stated that his (Cirrus "pilot") pattern entry was
bad. His response was "I called it out." I told him that it was not
good when other planes are using a standard pattern. Had he been the
only one around I would not have cared.

Thus my assessment is that Cirrus pilots have too much money and
inadequate pilot skills/common sense. Other fatal crashes just add to
this perception.

Ron Lee

"Ron Lee" wrote in message
...
Coming back from KCOS to 00V today several aircraft were in the
pattern for runway 33 and some people...

major deletion

...ey and
inadequate pilot skills/common sense. Other fatal crashes just add to
this perception.

Ron Lee

...and you, of course, did nothing wrong????

"Casey Wilson" N2310D @ gmail.com wrote:


"Ron Lee" wrote in message
...
Coming back from KCOS to 00V today several aircraft were in the
pattern for runway 33 and some people...

major deletion

...ey and
inadequate pilot skills/common sense. Other fatal crashes just add to
this perception.

Ron Lee

...and you, of course, did nothing wrong????

Other than letting the issue of watching for other traffic ...
particularly the Cirrus .. distract me from being at a better
airpseed. NO The go around was the proper response to the "excess"
airspeed.

Ron Lee

Ron Lee wrote:

Thus my assessment is that Cirrus pilots have too much money and
inadequate pilot skills/common sense. Other fatal crashes just add to
this perception.


A problem with your extrapolation from this single data point is that I know
someone that has similarly poor pattern behavior but who is a 182 owner.

- Andrew

Andrew Gideon wrote:

Ron Lee wrote:

Thus my assessment is that Cirrus pilots have too much money and
inadequate pilot skills/common sense. Other fatal crashes just add to
this perception.


A problem with your extrapolation from this single data point is that I know
someone that has similarly poor pattern behavior but who is a 182 owner.

- Andrew

Andrew, I have had concerns about Cirrus pilots after reading of some
of the parachute deployments. This just adds fuel even if not
statistically significant.

Ron Lee

On Sun, 15 Jan 2006 05:30:25 GMT, (Ron Lee)
wrote:

I have had concerns about Cirrus pilots after reading of some
of the parachute deployments.

I skim the Aero-News Propwash newsletter each morning. It often seems
that there's a Cirrus deployment de jour. Aero-News thinks it's a
great thing that the parachute saves so many air crew. I think it's a
shame that the parachute trashes so many airframes.

It's a wonder Cirrus pilots can get insurance. Are we paying for them?



-- all the best, Dan Ford

email: usenet AT danford DOT net

Warbird's Forum: www.warbirdforum.com
Piper Cub Forum: www.pipercubforum.com
In Search of Lost Time: www.readingproust.com

"Cub Driver" usenet AT danford DOT net wrote in message
...
On Sun, 15 Jan 2006 05:30:25 GMT, (Ron Lee)
wrote:

I have had concerns about Cirrus pilots after reading of some
of the parachute deployments.

I skim the Aero-News Propwash newsletter each morning. It often seems
that there's a Cirrus deployment de jour. Aero-News thinks it's a
great thing that the parachute saves so many air crew. I think it's a
shame that the parachute trashes so many airframes.

It's a wonder Cirrus pilots can get insurance. Are we paying for them?

Yes. It's a great country we live in eh? I also get to pay for all the
motor vehicle idiots, as well as all the medical idiots as well as all the
unemployed, lawsuits, prisions, etc, etc, etc. Gotta love a system of taxes
and insurance...

On Sun, 15 Jan 2006 05:29:09 -0500, Cub Driver usenet AT danford DOT
net wrote:

On Sun, 15 Jan 2006 05:30:25 GMT, (Ron Lee)
wrote:

I have had concerns about Cirrus pilots after reading of some
of the parachute deployments.

I skim the Aero-News Propwash newsletter each morning. It often seems
that there's a Cirrus deployment de jour. Aero-News thinks it's a
great thing that the parachute saves so many air crew. I think it's a
shame that the parachute trashes so many airframes.

It's a wonder Cirrus pilots can get insurance. Are we paying for them?

We have a husband and wife who have His and hers SR22s on the field,
the cost of insurance was more for an SR22 than for a Glasair III and
they take all the training they can get. They are good pilots,
instrument rated, commercial, and active; flying over 700 hours a year
between the two of them.

What they pay on one SR22 is about a third of what I was quoted for
the insurance on a *new* TBM 700.

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com



-- all the best, Dan Ford

email: usenet AT danford DOT net

Warbird's Forum: www.warbirdforum.com
Piper Cub Forum: www.pipercubforum.com
In Search of Lost Time: www.readingproust.com

I skim the Aero-News Propwash newsletter each morning. It often seems
that there's a Cirrus deployment de jour. Aero-News thinks it's a
great thing that the parachute saves so many air crew. I think it's a
shame that the parachute trashes so many airframes.


1) There have been six 'chute deployments in six years.

2) Four of the six are flying again (the fifth deployment just occurred
this weekend).
---
Ken Reed

Ken Reed wrote:

2) Four of the six are flying again (the fifth deployment just occurred
this weekend).

You mean four of the aircraft? That's rather impressive considering that a
deployment is supposed to total the aircraft.

Or do you mean four of the pilots?

- Andrew